[Community-Discuss] Call for Comments on a Revision to the RSA
h.lu at anytimechinese.com
Tue Oct 3 09:38:09 UTC 2017
"Your interest" is a very personal attack.
As I mentioned in my previous email, I view the RSA and policy as two
independent documents which serve for entirely different purposes. While
RSA allows AFRINIC to establish a legal relationship with its members so
AFRINIC can be funded, policies are specifically designed to manage
So by that logic, I don't think there should be any text inside both
documents to be complementary to each other.
If you think that any of these texts that I pointed out has a legal reason
to remain, feel free to point it out.
I am not a lawyer, what I do is to point out the texts which I believe are
unrelated to the legal relationship between AFRINIC and its member.
Even if a certain policy text is missing, we shouldn't expect RSA to
enforce a policy that doesn't exist yet. Rather, we should make a policy
proposal to ratify the policy.
But anyway, can we discuss specific cause here instead of arguing whether
we should use RSA to manage resource?
On 3 October 2017 at 17:02, Mike Silber <silber.mike at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think you are misinterpreting the comment made.
> I think both Omo and Adewole were supporting the principle you expressed
> (resource management is better addressed in policy than in a legal
> agreement). Apologies to both if I am misrepresenting you.
> The concern being raised is that absent specific policy on those issues we
> cannot remove those clauses from the RSA, lest we create a lacunae that
> could cause problems.
> The suggestion (as I view it) as that we propose and finalise policy to
> replace the items in the RSA and once the policy has been ratified, we
> agree a mechanism to remove that issue from the RSA.
> I did not see any ad hominem attack and I don’t think any was intended.
> On 3 Oct 2017, at 10:27, Lu Heng <h.lu at anytimechinese.com> wrote:
> On 3 October 2017 at 15:53, Omo Oaiya <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:
>> On 3 Oct 2017, at 06:59, Lu Heng <h.lu at anytimechinese.com> wrote:
>> Those ip addresses management clause inside RSA was written by lawyers,
>> not the community. According to bottom up process, only policy can dictate
>> how we use IP addresses.
>> It is AfriNIC that facilitates this bottom up process. It is also it
>> responsibility to coordinate the management of INR. Some might say this
>> is its primary responsibility.
>> Until a policy gets developed by the community, the RSA is the only
>> mechanism available for fufilling this management mandate. Your interest
>> in removing these clauses from the RSA is probably better served by
>> proposing policy that makes them redundant as Dewole suggests.
>> "My interest" is a weird misinterpretation and completely not true(why
> must it get personal every time, omo? ) I barely point out the clause that
> contains IP address management material(and I might have missed some).
> Those words are written by lawyers to manage IP addresses - this shouldn't
> happen in the very first place, because in the bottom up process, only
> community-developed policies are able to manage the IP address, which is
> the golden rule of bottom up process. Operators get to decide how they want
> to use and manager the very resource they are using instead of lawyers.
> By your logic, if there is a missing item in the policy, we should simply
> ask lawyers to add it to the RSA until community makes a redundant policy -
> but this is not how PDP works. PDP is not served as a way to replicate what
> lawyers wrote. Rather, if you think there is a missing item in the policy,
> you will have to make a policy proposal, and see if community agrees.
> RSA should in no way serve as a complementary to the policy, rather, they
> are two independent documents that serve for entirely different purposes.
> While RSA allows AFRINIC to establish a legal relationship with its members
> so AFRINIC can be funded, policies are specifically designed to manage
> internet resources.
> Kind regards.
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Community-Discuss